With the first issue of volume eleven, Management and Organization Review turns a new leaf by welcoming Cambridge University Press as the new publisher. I am very pleased to note that the complex and extensive transition from Wiley to Cambridge University Press, which involved a very demanding and detailed process, has been accomplished on time and almost without any crisis. I would like to take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation to Tina Minchella, MOR Managing Editor, for overseeing and supporting the transition process, Zhijun Yao, Executive Director of IACMR in Beijing, for her tireless support, and to Rebecca O’Rourke, Senior Commissioning Editor, Social Science Journals Cambridge University Press, and her team for making the transition as seamless as possible. We look forward to an active partnership with CUP which will elevate the awareness of MOR in every region of the world and grow recognition of MOR from leading libraries around the world. We also look forward to a new proactive, multifaceted marketing and media strategy under the leadership of Professor Sheen Levine, the new Deputy Editor-in-Chief for Research Outreach, which will draw attention to MOR's expanded editorial coverage and increase high quality submission of manuscripts.

As a scholarly field matures, theories emerge that guide paradigms and shape consensus in academic discourse. Management theories reflect a shared consensus on how individual behaviors or organizational actions result in a certain set of outcomes and under specific conditions. Clearly, theory is paramount to guiding whether models of potential relationships bear out and how and why we would expect a relationship or specific outcome. Yet much of this theory is derived from cumulative empirical evidence from a ‘context’ that has remained a silent partner in our quest for a theoretical contribution. A growing number of papers emphasize the theoretical contribution as disembodied from the context in which the empirical evidence of a causal relationship was gleaned. As an applied field, the emphasis on theory with disregard to the context of management practice presents a challenge for progress both as a scholarly domain and for credibility in what we teach and how we consult, or how we effect positive social change. This guest editorial joins a chorus of recent editorials in this journal (e.g., Tsui, 2013) and elsewhere (e.g., George, 2014) that suggest we rethink management scholarship, rejuvenate our ideas for research, and embed a nugget of practice in scholarly discourse.

I am honored to join the MOR editorial team as the editor for Dialogue, Debate, and Discussion. My commitment is to facilitate dialogue, debate, and discussion on management and organization theory that is rooted in practice in emerging economies yet has implications beyond. Let us learn ‘slowly’ (cf. Levinthal & March, 1993) and resist too fast convergence to Western management methods before we have a chance to better understand and assimilate the divergence around the world.

Issues of ethics, justice, and social responsibility are as fundamental to organizational behavior as they are to society at large. As contracts are forged, individuals employed, and power differentials created, opportunities for exploitation, oppression, and victimization emerge. In contrast, as social structures evolve, coordinated opportunities arise for imparting positive social change at the community, environmental, and societal levels. Inherent to all of these phenomena is the application of norms surrounding moral behavior. Norms about what is considered fair and ethical underlie how individuals perceive and evaluate the behaviors and decisions of others; how groups and societies define acceptable behavior; and how individuals, groups, and societies evaluate the decisions and actions of organizations. In addition to defining standards, these norms also drive the reactions (or sanctions) against those who violate them.

Studies on the relationship between corporate social responsibilities (CSR) and firm performance have mostly looked at large public firms in developed countries. In this study, we analyze this relationship using a sample of privately owned firms in China, a developing economy context. We hypothesize a negative relationship between commitment to CSR and average sales growth for privately-owned firms operating in weak institutional environments. Further, we hypothesize that smaller firms will show a stronger negative relationship than larger firms. CEO survey data from a sample of 630 Chinese private firms confirm the moderating role of firm size. However, the results are not entirely as expected. The negative relationship is observed in small firms (100 or fewer employees), but the relationship is positive for large firms (greater than 1000 employees), consistent with the literature. We discuss implications for public policy and future research.

Taking an inductive approach followed by validation techniques, we analyzed the meaning and dimensionality of the organizational justice construct in the People's Republic of China (China). By using qualitative and quantitative methods, we found that organizational justice involves a higher level of subjectivity in the Chinese context. Interpretation and organizational justice judgments depend on the specific situation and social relations involved. The findings revealed similarities with the Western conceptualization with one important exception, suggesting both cultural values and institutional environment shape justice judgments and managerial practices in China. The article concludes with a discussion of the findings and implications for management theory, research, and practice.

There is regular and explicit media coverage of employee behaviour intended to advance organizational goals, but that harms stakeholder interests in ways that exceed necessity and reason. Although several constructs such as workplace deviance, organizational misbehaviour, corporate crime and corruption, and unethical pro-organizational behaviour have been advanced to account for this type of behaviour, no comprehensive framework exists that also includes the full scope of its important consequences. Accordingly, we propose the umbrella construct of detrimental citizenship behaviour (DCB) that allows us to integrate and build upon previous related conceptualizations that have developed mostly in parallel bodies of research. We rely on ethical decision-making, creativity, and instrumental stakeholder theories to embed the umbrella DCB construct within a multi-level and longitudinal model. The DCB model includes processes through which such behaviour and its consequences unfold over time for organizational members, organizations, and society at large. The proposed framework describes, explains, and predicts DCB and also leads to suggestions for future research. In addition, we offer suggestions regarding how to manage this highly consequential type of organizational behaviour, thereby engaging in a much-needed science-practice dialogue in management and organization studies.

The business ethics literature has paid little attention to the similarities, differences, and interactions between ‘justice climate’ and ‘ethical work climate’, two key perspectives on the moral dimension of organizations that are related to cultural diversity. In this conceptual paper we argue that integrative studies of justice and ethical work climates could contribute significantly to our understanding of the moral dimensions of organizations. We propose a model showing that an organization's moral climate can perform both normative and evaluative functions. With the globalization of business and increasing diversification of the labour force, cross-cultural differences regarding organizational perceptions and behaviours are increasingly salient. Hence, we also explore the influence of cultural diversity in our integrated model with the Chinese business context as a specific example. We conclude by discussing directions for further research on the relationship between cultural diversity and moral climate in organizations.

We investigate how trust reduces the tendency to use deception in negotiations from a culturally contextual perspective. We find culturally divergent patterns across Chinese and American negotiators. Specifically, for Chinese negotiators, cognition-based trust decreases the approval of using negative emotional and informational deception, whereas affect-based trust increases the approval of using informational deception. For American negotiators, affect-based trust decreases the approval of using negative emotional deception. We discuss theoretical and practical implications on the need for culturally specific strategies in managing deceptions in negotiations.

Although employees react negatively when employers hire individuals with whom the employers have personal ties, the practice is prevalent worldwide. One factor contributing to the discrepancy between reactions to the practice may be differences in cultural beliefs and institutions regarding perceptions about hiring decisions. To examine cross-national differences in perceptions about hiring personal ties, we conducted a consensus analysis on the perceived fairness, profitability, and overall evaluation of hiring decisions in China and the United States. We find cross-national differences in consensus levels as to whether people believe it is fair or unfair to hire moderately qualified candidates with employer ties (kinships or close friends with the employer) and whether people positively or negatively evaluate the hiring of unqualified candidates with stakeholder ties (ties to business associates or government officials). We also find contrasting areas of consensus about whether hiring unqualified candidates with stakeholder ties is profitable. Implications for research on cultural comparisons of perceptions of hiring practices and guanxi are discussed.